Indian gaming – Page 20

Petitioners, the Honorable Greg Treat, Senate President Pro Tempore, and the Honorable Charles McCall, Speaker of the House, request the Court to assume original jurisdiction to declare that the new tribal gaming compacts between the State and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians and between the State and the Kialegee Tribal Town are invalid under Oklahoma law. The Court assumes original jurisdiction. Okla. Const. art. VII, § 4. The Court invokes its publici juris doctrine to assume original jurisdiction here as Petitioners have presented this Court with an issue of public interest in urgent need of judicial determination. Fent v. Contingency Review Bd., 2007 OK 27, ¶ 11, 163 P.3d 512, 521. The Court grants the declaratory relief sought by Petitioners, as the Executive branch did not validly enter into the new tribal gaming compacts with the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians and the Kialegee Tribal Town. Ethics Comm’n of State of Okla. v. Cullison, 1993 OK 37, ¶ 4, 850 P.2d 1069, 1072.

Federal Court Dismisses Tort Claim against Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation Gaming Company

January 5, 2021Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Nguyen v. Cache Creek Resort Casino (E.D. Cal.):

29 Motion for Sanctions

31 Magistrate Report

Club One Casino v. Bernhardt Cert Petition [North Fork Rancheria]

December 31, 2020June 4, 2021Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the petition in Club One Casino Inc. v. Bernhardt:

Club One Petition for Writ of Certiorari

Appendix

Lower court materials here and here.

Update:

Brief in Opposition

Update in Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians v. Dept. of the Interior

December 7, 2020Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are updated materials in Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians v. Dept. of the Interior (D.D.C.):

34 DCt Order on Supplementing Admin Record

37 Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation Motion for Reconsideration

38 Opposition

39 Reply

40 DCT Order Denying Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation Motion

Prior post here.

Materials in Suit against Caesars [Rincon Band]

December 2, 2020ilpc

Here are the materials so far in Pilant v. Caesars Entertainment Services Inc. (S.D. Cal.):

1 Notice of Removal

1-5 Complaint

3-1 Motion to Dismiss

4 Response

5 Reply

6 DCT Order

An excerpt:

This matter is before the Court on a motion by specially appearing Defendants Caesars Enterprise Services, LLC (“CES”) and Caesars Entertainment, Inc. (“CEI”) to dismiss the complaint for failure to join an indispensable party and for lack of personal jurisdiction. The motion has been fully briefed, and the Courtdeems it suitable for submission without oral argument. As discussed below, the motion to dismiss for failure to join an indispensable party is denied and the motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction is granted in part and denied in part.